Encrypted Sparsebundle Disk Image or Mac App Store App?

[PatriotInvasion]

I'm looking to password protect a few folders on my iMac, and wondering what my best approach would be. I traditionally have created an encrypted sparsebundle to stash away files I want to hide, but with some of these new apps on the Mac App Store offering folder password functionality, I'm wondering if the sparsebundle is even needed anymore.

What do you guys think and has anyone used some of these folder password apps in the App Store?

 

[ljx718]

I'm looking to password protect a few folders on my iMac, and wondering what my best approach would be. I traditionally have created an encrypted sparsebundle to stash away files I want to hide, but with some of these new apps on the Mac App Store offering folder password functionality, I'm wondering if the sparsebundle is even needed anymore.

What do you guys think and has anyone used some of these folder password apps in the App Store?

I'll always go OS over an app. i also use a sparsebundle to hide a few files. i like that the password is with the file and not with an app. Also, can transfer from system to system with no hassles.

 

[robgendreau]

Looking at review of some of those, they don't inspire confidence...and you'd want to be confident it wouldn't screw up.

What you've been doing works fine. If you want an easier to use version of the same, try Knox by Agilebits (the 1Password developers). It's essentially the same technology as I understant it. Or TrueCrypt; I use it because it's cross platform and open source, but essentially similar technology as well.

And Filevault has had some improvements in ML, e.g. the ability to use control click to encrypt a volume.

I agree it's a bit more of a pain to use a volume instead of a folder, but I guess there's a good reason behind that and it just works.

 

[PatriotInvasion]

Good replies. The sparsebundle is fine I guess. The only thing seems to be that even though it can be backed up to time machine, the files are forever locked in the disk image if the main HD fails. Is that correct?

 

[\-V-/]

The only thing seems to be that even though it can be backed up to time machine, the files are forever locked in the disk image if the main HD fails. Is that correct?

Yes, that's correct. Which is why it's a good idea to have several backups of files you deem extremely important.

 

[CyBeRino]

Good replies. The sparsebundle is fine I guess. The only thing seems to be that even though it can be backed up to time machine, the files are forever locked in the disk image if the main HD fails. Is that correct?

Well, no.

The advantage of an encrypted disk image over a separate encrypted partition is that even if the disk image isn't mounted, it'll be backed up if it's on a disk that time machine backs up. It'll just back-up the disk image which you can then restore if the original drive fails.

However, if you were to forget the password, that'd be a different problem.

 

[PatriotInvasion]

What if I have an encrypted sparsebundle backed up on an external drive...clean install Mac OS 10.9 (whatever it ends up being called) and drag back over the sparsebundle to the clean OS?

I'm guessing because I would have erased the drive in that scenario, the sparsebundle would not mount, or at least, would not have any files to display. This happened to me from Snow Leopard to Lion last year.

For Mountain Lion, I removed all files from the sparse I had on Lion and created a brand new sparsebundle once I clean installed Mountain Lion. Just trying to better understand the ramifications of these disk images. Thanks.

 

[Ozy]

I use Knox over my Synology SAN and have had very good luck with it. I think one of the coolest features of Knox is as you close out a vault, it clears the "Recents" of any application that was invoked when running or opening files inside that vault. It also then closes the application if desired as well. Nice polish.

 

[CyBeRino]

What if I have an encrypted sparsebundle backed up on an external drive...clean install Mac OS 10.9 (whatever it ends up being called) and drag back over the sparsebundle to the clean OS?

I'm guessing because I would have erased the drive in that scenario, the sparsebundle would not mount, or at least, would not have any files to display. This happened to me from Snow Leopard to Lion last year.

No that works fine. A sparesebundle is just a regular disk image but it works a bit differently internally to lessen the required disk space.

Internally it works with multiple files inside the bundle. If you want slightly more security (in terms of chances of things breaking), use a regular dmg instead of a sparse one. But it shouldn't be necessary.